Category: Uncategorized

This post is intended for those who are participating in the Voxiversity II study of Rothbard’s America’s Great Depression to have the chance to ask any questions that were missed or overlooked in the Saturday comments. So, if there’s something you were missing, feel free to ask away. In the meantime, I noticed that Question 4 was the one with which the most people had trouble. “In 1982, what did Rothbard believe would be the outcome of Reaganomics?”

The most common incorrect answer was that he thought it would be a short-term success but a long-term failure. That’s pretty much how it turned out, in fact, since Volcker’s incredible interest-rate increases did have the effect of shocking the economy and rapidly correcting the malinvestment imbalances, but since Reagan failed to reduce spending, the palliative didn’t quite last a decade. On page xxiii, Rothbard wrote:

“Reaganomics—a blend of monetarism and fiscal Keynesianism swathed in classical liberal and supply-side rhetoric—is in no way going to solve the problem of inflationary depression or of the business cycle. But if Reaganomics is doomed to be a fiasco, what is likely to happen? Will we suffer a replay, as many voices are increasingly predicting, of the Great Depression of the 1930s? Certainly there are many ominous signs and parallels.”

Obviously, Rothbard’s timing was incorrect; 1987 did not mark the collapse of the American economy into another Great Depression. But then, no one expected the Federal Reserve to throw all caution and common sense to the wind and reduce interest rates to all-time historic lows in the process of blowing a series of investment bubbles.

In light of the last two days, Cyn.ical’s comment is rather appropriate: “[M]y thought as I was reading the introductions, was ‘Well! A Sixth Edition ought to be coming out any day now!'”

Joel Belz explains the source of socialism’s revenant appeal in the United States:

While strenuously wrestling over business and banking and health care and energy and a dozen other issues, we cavalierly handed over to the state a perpetual 90 percent share of the nation’s educational interests. America regularly has about 50 million children enrolled in K-12 schools, and about 20 million more in colleges and universities—and while the pattern fluctuates a little, 90 percent of those 70 million young people regularly get a state-flavored view of reality.

Socialized medicine? Most of us recoil at the idea. Socialized airlines? Reminds us of Aeroflot. Socialized banks? When it happened last month, it terrified us.

But socialized schools? Nine out of ten of us patronize them regularly. And we do so with na’ry a thought or concern about how such an arrangement affects next week’s election, or the election after that, or the lifetime of elections to come.

Seizing the intellectual high ground of education has always been a priority for totalitarians. Marx advocated it, Lenin prioritized it, Hitler incorporated it into his 25-point plan. It’s important because it negates the natural advantage of conservatives, which is that they propagate themselves. Socialists, by and large, don’t, which is why they have to propagate by parasitic conversion.

Since it’s now far too late to salvage the USA in its present form, the important thing is to build for the future. If there’s one thing certain about dysfunctional societies, it is that they are doomed to collapse. Therefore it is much more important to focus on building a foundation for future freedom than to chase after yesterday’s vanished liberties. Having children and teaching them well is the single most significant and revolutionary act any individual can reasonably hope to achieve at this time.

The short-term battle is over and the USSA is upon us. But it will be a short-lived entity by virtue of the Invisible Hand’s iron fist; the only real question is if its successor will be the North American Union or a collection of rump-states of widely varying social structures. Five years ago, I would have assumed the former, but now, given the increasing devolution in Europe and chaos in Mexico, the latter is looking rather less improbable than before.

It is a truly noble profession:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah, well, you know what? I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work, and I think that —

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Is that your job? You just talked about being a journalist!

MATTHEWS: Yeah, it is my job. My job is to help this country.

It’s been a long, long time, but at least they’re finally coming out in the open about their bias. Is there any doubt that Chris Matthews, and Keith Olbermann, and Katie Couric, and nearly every other TV and print journalist won’t do everything they can to make the Obama presidency work?

John Hawkins lists seven reasons why the idea of building the Republican Party around moderates won’t work:

[T]he GOP absolutely cannot build a successful political party around “moderates.”

Why is that the case?

1) What constitutes a “moderate” changes from person to person. That’s how people like Joe Lieberman and Chuck Hagel, neither of whom would agree on just about anything, can both be considered “moderates” in their parties.

Put another way: a socially conservative, anti-abortion voter who believes in big government policies could be fairly called a moderate. On the other hand, a socially liberal, pro-abortion voter who doesn’t want any new government programs could also be fairly called a moderate.

So, since what constitutes being a “moderate” changes from person to person, it’s not possible to build a party around appealing to “moderates.”

2) Because moderates tend to be much less ideological, less knowledgable about politics, and less informed than liberals and conservatives, it’s entirely possible that even if our candidate’s views are closer to their views, they won’t be capable of figuring it out (That’s exactly how it worked with McCain and Obama, for example).

I don’t always see eye to eye with John, but it sounds as if he’s already lining up against the Squish Faction. Which is really no surprise, if you recall that he was disinvited from the Republican Convention for his forthright primary opposition to John McCain.

A post-mortem from the UK:

Republicans are now divided between social conservatives for whom abortion and gay marriage still override all other concerns, and moderates who think the fanaticism of some evangelical voters has driven away independent voters. Many fear the collapse of the Reagan coalition, which united social, fiscal and foreign policy conservatives….

The moderates on Wednesday began to voice the view that Mr Obama’s ability to win states in the previously Republican south and mountain west means that in order to compete, Republicans must also change their battle map and again contest Democratic seats in the north east that they have not won in a generation. David Frum, the former White House speech writer, who has emerged as a standard bearer for what might be deemed the ‘David Cameron’ wing of the Republicans, said that the party must change and start addressing issues that concern floating voters.

“We’re not in good shape. Two big things won this election for Barack Obama: a big increase in turnout by ethnic minorities and a big shift in preference by college educated white people. That is where the Bush collapse really took place. That is where Sarah Palin was such a damaging force in the Republican Party. She symbolised a problem that in the eyes of many college educated white people, who Bush got in 2004 and the Republicans owned in the 1980s, the Republican party has become the party of culture war;”

The view from Arizona, where Republicans were digesting John McCain’s defeat, proved that Mr Frum will have a hard time winning over those doctrinaire conservatives who believe that it is the Republican brand, rather than its principles, that is damaged and that it is the Bush administration’s abandonment of the small government conservatism of the Reagan era that caused John McCain’s defeat.

In my opinion, David Frum’s analysis is factually incorrect and logically incoherent, and an intelligent observer will note that while the Republican pragmatists and moderates were obliterated – again – on Tuesday, it was culture war issues that not only triumphed in Democratic strongholds such as California, but downright dominated in battleground states that went for Obama such as Florida. This isn’t to say a cultural approach is a certain vote-winner in all circumstances; voters tend to be skittish of altering state constitutions and usually prefer to steer clear of the more comprehensive abortion bans, but there’s no question that the anti-homogamy, anti-abortion wing of the Republican Party is far more popular than the banker’s bail-out wing or the Israel First feather.

This should be completely obvious, since one of the main accusations leveled against Sarah Palin by the Frum camp has been that she is a “populist”.

“Cameronian” is an apt description of the squishy Republican moderate faction, since Cameron’s wets had absolutely no hope of defeating a decrepit and scandal-ridden Labour Party until Gordon Brown made the mistake of not calling for an election prior to the UK’s economic meltdown. What the Squish faction is calling for should be familiar to everyone who remembers the pre-Reagan Rockefeller Republicans: a Democrat Lite option designed to appeal primarily to those who generally favor an amount of government intervention but fear the Democrats have gone too far.

This is the political version of Brad Childress’s coaching strategy, with which every despairing Vikings fan is all too familiar. Try to keep it close, don’t take any risks or make any mistakes, just stay in the game and hope that your opponent makes a mistake towards the end that will let you steal a victory. In football, this strategy will win the occasional game, but it never wins the Super Bowl. (Don’t bother bringing up the Baltimore Ravens; if you’ve got a powerful defense capable of overwhelming the other offense at will and forcing it to make mistakes, then the caretaker-QB route is perfectly viable.)

It’s worth noting that the same Republican squishes who are now inaccurately claiming that social conservatism is the problem simultaneously cling to three of the most widely unpopular policies in politics today: the military occupations, the Wall Street bail-outs, and open migration. If the Frum faction remains influential in the Republican Party, they will ensure its return to the tiny minorities of the FRD era. Followership is not a functional strategy in any field of life, least of all national politics.

Evidence that it is pragmatic Republicanism that was rejected yesterday, not the conservatism that Republicans nominally represented:

Proposition 8 ballot to ban gay marriage set to pass in California. With 63 per cent of the state’s voting district results in, the measure was leading by 52.4 to 47.6 per cent…. A ban on gay marriage was approved in Arizona and a similar measure looked set to pass in Florida. Meanwhile in Arkansas, voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents. Supporters made clear their main target was gays and lesbians.

Perhaps now the homogamy emos will be a bit more open to the idea that the State should not be in the marriage business that they previously dismissed as theoretical. As with everything else, the State with the power to invent a faux marriage ex nihilo, has the power to void it at will too.

Mickey Kaus unintentionally explains why Republicans shouldn’t have voted for Bush in 2004:

Tomorrow, if all goes as expected, Democrats should pause to be grateful that John Kerry didn’t get 70,000 more votes in Ohio in 2004. What would have happened if Kerry had won? 1) He would have presided over a slow motion loss, or continuing stalemate, in Iraq. No way Kerry would ever have approved the “surge.” 2) He would also have presided over the current housing and financial collapse that has both broken economic growth and, apparently, destroyed any chances of the incumbent party retaining the White House. Democrats don’t bear the main blame for this crisis, but is there any reason to think they would have prevented it? I can’t think of one. We’d be looking at a Republican wave instead of a Democratic sweep. …

Of course, Republicans shouldn’t have nominated Bush back in 2000 either.

A message from Marcher Lord:

I’m incredibly pleased. Your surgers did an amazing thing yesterday. As I’d hoped, there was a wonderful piggyback effect on the other two MLP books. “The Personifid Project” rose to #14,470, which was enough to rank it #4 in Religion & Spirituality > Fiction > Science Fiction & Fantasy. And “Hero, Second Class” rose to #4,796. Thank you to you and your readers for initiating and carrying out this surge. Their excitement about the surge and then their participation in it made this experiment exceed anything I had dreamed of for it.

For the record, here’s the statistics for Summa Elvetica on Amazon:

#141 in Books

#1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Literature & Fiction > Fiction
#1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Literature & Fiction > Science Fiction & Fantasy
#2 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Fiction
#12 in Books > Science Fiction & Fantasy > Fantasy

As a happy coincidence, yesterday morning I received my author’s copies and so got to see the actual book for the first time. It’s really quite a pretty book and on the basis of its looks alone, I don’t think those who participated in the SE surge will regret adding it to their library. It may please some of you to know that thanks primarily to the enthusiasm that’s been expressed, I found myself motivated to do a little scribbling of late; I’m not promising another novel per se, but at the very least there will be more stories involving Marcus Valerius and company.

Thanks very much to everyone who participated. I really appreciate it. And I hope you will let me know if you enjoy the novel.

I have to admit that I’m feeling quite cheerful this morning. John Derbyshire pretty much sums up my thoughts, except that I’m not in the least bit sour about the results of the election despite the failure of my McCain call; these events are precisely what I unsuccessfully attempted to warn conservatives and Republicans would be the logical outcome of their political pragmatism since 2003:

All right, I’m sour. The most liberal member of the U.S. Senate! And that shakedown-artist of a wife, with the permanent frown! And Joe Biden! …

I’m sour about the GOP too. What did it all get us, those 8 years of pandering and spending? If GWB had turned his face against new entitlements, closed the borders, deported the illegals, held the line on calls to loosen mortgage-lending standards, starved the Department of Education, and declined those invitations to mosque functions, would the GOP be in any worse shape now?…

Where was conservatism in this election? Where was restraint in government? Where was national sovereignty? Where was liberty? Where was self-support? And where are those things now? Where are they headed this next four years?

What Derb strongly implies, but does not explicitly point out, was that conservatism, government restraint, national sovereignty, liberty and self-support weren’t just lacking in this election, but more importantly, were completely absent from the Republican governance of the last eight years. All of these things were rejected at the advice of the more influential part of the conservative commentariat in the name of the Iraqi occupation and political pragmatism.

How practical is a “pragmatism” that manages to turn a Republican White House, House, and Senate into a Democratic White House, House, and Senate?

Leadership requires principle; pragmatism and pandering are simply followership. The “reformed conservatism” of a David Frum or a Russ Douthat that many Republicans will be tempted to embrace will be a fatal strategic mistake; the further that the newly empowered Democrats overreach to the left, the more important it will be for Republicans to offer a genuinely libertarian alternative.

There is no reason whatsoever to mourn a McCain loss. None. No one can reasonably argue that Mr. Bipartisan would ever imperil his amicable relations with his good friends on the other side of the aisle. Just as George Bush ensured the appearance of a Barack Obama, four years of John McCain presiding over the current economy would have not only moved the country in the same direction that Obama will take it, but ensured that his inevitable Democratic successor would be even worse than Obama.

As for my failed political predictions, do keep in mind that I batted .250 this round. Incorrect on Pataki, incorrect on Clinton, correct on Palin, incorrect on McCain. Not impressive, but not exactly bad when you consider that most of these predictions were made months in advance; everyone knows I’ve been expecting Bush’s successor to be some form of Democrat for literally years. More than one long-time regular correctly surmised via email that, in addition to my fear of a McCain presidency, there was a bit of the cruelty artist behind that most recent call. And as one sharp-eyed Obama supporter noted in the comments, the case for the McCain scenario foundered upon the fact that most of the polls in the battleground states tended to exceed the five-point fudge that was its justification. (In the spirit of the new U.S. president, I’m throwing the Baseball Savant under the bus.) Note that despite Obama’s win, the new model polls simply were not accurate, the final Gallup poll and final Zogby poll both had Obama +11 nationally, while CNN currently has the actual results at 52-47 with 96 percent reporting. That would indicate that the five-percent rule actually underestimated the major poll bias, not that it helped John McCain. UPDATE – Jonah Goldberg points out that the supposedly historic youth vote doesn’t appear to have been what it was projected to be either.

So, what now? I’m not concerned about whatever it is that the Democrats occupy themselves with doing over the next few months, since it’s not going to work and will only exacerbate the present problems. Yes, it will be outrageous, yes it will be stupid, and yes, it will all end in tears, but that’s obvious. I have little interest in attempting to guess precisely with what idiocies they will indulge themselves. The much more important thing is how the right reacts to all of this. Will it be the Euro-style Christian Democrat conservativism that the anti-Palin crowd are preaching in order to nibble away at the edges or will it be a principled Ron Paul opposition party?

Obviously, the latter is the correct strategy and one that will be positioned to take advantage of the problems caused by Democratic dalliance with overt socialism. But, I would not put it past the GOP elite to embrace what killed them while rejecting what would have permitted them to maintain their hold on the reins of power. However, keep in mind that all of this may well be irrelevant anyhow, as the untrammeled migration of the next four years may well lay the foundation for Karl Rove’s permanent majority party, albeit not the precise party he was contemplating.

As for the VP crew, here’s how we voted yesterday. I suspect that this may help explain how the election actually turned more on those who didn’t turn out for McCain rather than those who did turn out for Obama.

31% (N) None of the above (413)
30% (R) John McCain (402)
23% (C) Chuck Baldwin (303)
11% (L) Bob Barr (147)
05% (D) Barack Obama (60)

This should make clear what I have stated many times before: Vox Popoli is neither a Republican blog nor an echo chamber. I hope the Libertarians also learned that it’s a really bad idea to run a non-libertarian as their candidate. I think it’s clearly time for Libertarians and the Constitution Party to work out their differences and create a Freedom Alliance capable of succeeding the Republicans if they insist on going the way of the Whigs.

UPDATE – National Review finally bothers to notice something rather salient: “[A]ll the folks who told us McCain was the man, from Christopher Buckley to New Hampshire’s primary voters, had no difficulty abandoning him for Obama.” – Mark Steyn.

UPDATE II – “There was no spectacular youth vote or black vote. What there was was a spectacular seven-million strong abandonment of the Republican candidate, less than half of whom switched to the Dem.” Gee, I wonder why that happened?

2008 VP Election Results:

31% (N) None of the above (413)
30% (R) John McCain (402)
23% (C) Chuck Baldwin (303)
11% (L) Bob Barr (147)
05% (D) Barack Obama (60)

1,325 votes

I think it will be interesting to see how the results compare to the last time around, when 736 votes were cast as follows:

37% (R) George Bush (276)
34% (L) Michael Badnarik (254)
14% (C) Michael Peroutka (105)
10% (N) I didn’t vote (74)
04% (D) John Kerry (27)

This post will stay on top until the poll-blogging starts today, so scroll down for non-election related posts. And if there’s anything interesting going on at your local polling place, be sure to let us know.

9:18 PM – Ohio called for Obama. That should suffice to shoot down my prediction of an upset, although it’s certainly not conclusive at this point. I still expect that the pre-election polls will be shown to be inaccurate, but apparently not as inaccurate as I’d thought. I’m going to call it a night now, so if someone could do the hourly updates on the surge for me, I’d appreciate it.

9:11 PM – Republican suicide by Karl Rove. Hispanics make up 40 percent of the New Mexico electorate and go heavily for Obama. Serves John McAmnesty right. Seriously, who pays these jokers to be political strategists? They’re blatantly incompetent. The average turn-based strategy gamer would do better. Hell, the RTS guys would too. FPS triggermen, probably not.

9:01 PM – Fox mistakenly puts a checkmark calling Ohio for Obama. But it, Virginia, and Indiana are still counting votes and too close to call. Kind of running out of steam here, though, so it would be nice to see how Virginia shakes out sooner rather than later.

8:46 PM – Holy cats, #161! I never thought we’d come within 500 spots of TIA, let alone 100. Unbelievable. Barone reports that the exit polls in Virginia are overestimating Obama’s votes by more than 10 percent.

8:39 PM – Georgia called for McCain, so the Obama landslide idea is probably a non-starter.

8:15 PM – The first sign my prediction is wrong. New Hampshire called for Obama; National Review has given Pennsylvania to Obama as well. Twenty minutes later, so has Fox. At this point, I’m pretty much waiting for Virginia to reach a conclusion since New Hampshire indicates that a major McCain overperformance is unlikely.

7:30 PM – Still too close to call in Indiana, Ohio, and Virginia. GA still too close to call, which would seem to be problematic for McCain. McCain did hold West Virginia, though, where the Senate and governorship both went Democratic, as well as South Carolina.

7:27 PM – I find Derb’s lack of faith disturbing.

7:06 PM – Some incongruities. A 15-percent lead in the Indiana exit polling for Obmama, but Fox has already called the state for the Republican governor and it’s still considered too close to call, as is Virginia.

6:16 PM – Pennsylvania exit polls report +15 Obama. Which would appear conclusive, had anyone white, male and over the age of 20 been asked how they voted.

5:41 PM – Oh noes! The eleven new voters in Indiana went for Obama! And newsflash! White men in Virginia tend to prefer McCain. In other news, water is still wet. There’s clearly a book in this for the Littlest Chickenhawk. 439, by the way… no, make that 299 and #1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Literature & Fiction > Fiction.

4:42 PM – 539!! And we should be getting the first projections in another 90 minutes.

3:48 PM – 995! The surge has cracked 1,000! And in what may or may not be an election report: “I’m not sure this is election news, but when I went to Fleet Farm last night to buy some last-minute deer hunting supplies, I saw they were completely sold out of shotgun buckshot loads, in all gauges and shot sizes. Which is really odd, because it’s not legal to hunt *anything* with buckshot in Minnesota.”

3:23 PM – “Somewhere in Hell, Capone, Thompson, and Daley are laughing…” – the OC.

3:10 PM – She is subtle, like a Ridgeback….

2:56 PM – All right. The prosecco is now in full E-F-F-E-C-T. Blue bottle, baby!

2:49 PM – 1,784 and #1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Literature & Fiction > Science Fiction & Fantasy. That will make Marcher Lord very happy indeed.

2:36 PM – That Black Panther is huge! A little disappointed with his interview, though. I was so hoping that he’d announce that he was with the S1W, boyeee.

1:52 PM – A thought. If something like 30 percent of black voters and new voters have voted already, as has been claimed in some reports, then a huge Election Day turnout would tend to suggest that either McCain is drawing a bigger turnout than expected or some people are voting more than once.

1:45 PM – Marcher Lord emails to let us know that at 5,484, Summa Elvetica has become the #1 book in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Fiction > Science Fiction & Fantasy, surpassing CS Lewis’s Perelandra.

12:15 PM – The Summa Elvetica surge commences! We’re starting at a lofty rank of 389,710 with an ultimate objective of cracking the top 999. (Small press, reasonable goals, you know?) Place your orders here!

12:08 PM – PANTHER POWER! Fox has the first sighting of Obama’s Schwarztruppen trying to run a little intimidation operation at a polling place. This is going to be more amusing than I’d thought!